Electrolux Z87 from 1971 - demonstration

A lovely example of the budget cylinder offered in the 1970s - as a late 1971 produced machine, it would have been sold alongside the Z94 (mid-range cylinder) and the Z310 (top of the range). Runs very smoothly thanks to some expert maintenance by my friend Dave (THANK YOU!) Very lucky and happy to now have this in my collection 😍

[@AaronDobb]

I like do the 70s style of the Electrolux vacuum cleaners they are very good 👍 and this one you are using And the Electrolux 87 cylinder vacuum cleaner sounds very healthy and quiet

[@andyElec]

@AaronDobb it's lovely, and in great working order now thanks to Dave 🤩

[@paco3343]

The Z87B is strikingly similar in style and design as its predecessor, the Z64. Another UA-camr stated that his Z87 was rated at 550-watts, while two other postings for the Z87B listed its rating as either 400- or 450-watts. I like how your description includes other contemporaneous Electrolux tanks. What Electrolux floor polisher was on the same sales floors?

[@andyElec]

I think that when the motors changed to the more familiar design, the 87 was fitted with a 550w motor, and this then carried on into the 96. I've seen the brochure from 1972 and the Floor Polisher shown there is the B22, but I'm not very familiar with the polishers or the commercial vacuums, so best guess would be the B22 at this point 😊

[@sdm3447]

@@andyElec Re: the motors, that is correct. The first cleaners had same motor as 64 & 77, and rated at 400w. The newer motor was 550 watt, although the 84 "enjoyed" two styles of vinyl covering to the cleaner - the first being stippled and with no branding on the sides, the latter being linear with the name & logo on the rear sides. Interesting how the 64 had a handle down the middle facing north to south, but the 77 that replaced it had a short one across the top from west to east, while the 87 reverted to a long north to south handle down the middle again.
However, the change of motor did not coincide with the change to the vinyl, rather the stippled version is the one that had both styles of motor.
Your hose here is a mystery, as I have never, ever, seen a woven hose that terminated into a double-cuff machine end. Has that been fitted by someone at a latter date? As you say, the original hose was woven and had a plain metal wand, although as time progressed the hoses were changed to that as as seen on your 170 (what I call a "Goblin" hose, based on the one they used on so many of their cleaners).

[@andyElec]

@sdm3447 that hose is odd isn't it! It actually came to me in a box with another 302, and the seller had picked up a huge haul of miscellaneous vacuum cleaners and parts, so that was the closest match for the 302 he had. Funnily enough I have seen almost the exact same hose on a 302 on UA-cam (If you search for The Cleaner's Cupboard, Ryan is using a 302 with this hose)... I wonder if it is the "actual" one! 😃

[@sdm3447]

​@@andyElec I have just found & watched that video. Indeed it is the same hose. While I have not seen the likes for quite some time (although I am very good friends with a collector in the same city who has a vast amount of parts), I have never seen the likes before. It really is odd. Also it is odd that the wand has a handgrip, but has no suction control - in order of features for the cylinder cleaners, the pattern was plain wand, wand with plain suction control, wand with handgrip and plain suction control, and wand with deluxe suction control feat. clip for dusting brush.
Only the uprights had a wand with a handgrip and no suction control. How is the machine end fitted to the hose? Do you suppose it's a hose from a 500 cleaner that has been attached to a later thread-style machine end? It really is most intriguing.

[@andyElec]

@sdm3447 I'll have to dig it out and see how it's fixed - I remember when I cleaned it, I couldn't separate the two cuffs so must be something holding them together that I've not see before. Could well be a 500 hose repurposed, though I have the Z91 manual and it features this exact type of hose and handle, but just with the single cuff and rubber seal piece to connect to the cleaner. It's very odd indeed!